Is it me, or is this fad for 200 word stories creating lazy writing? Surely if it's a piece worth writing, then character and plot development demand that it is longer than 200 words. A story needs to go somewhere!
gggareth, the popularity of the 200-worder can probably be explained if you read the threads discussing Abctale's 'page' in future issues of 'The Big Issue.'
(as an ed I quite like reading them, they make a refreshing change.)
In my experience, the more words I have to play with the lazier I get.
The 200 word thing is really, really hard to do. Trying to construct some sort of story in the tiniest of spaces is an interesting exercise.
What I've found is that, through writing 200 worders, I've actually become far more attuned to what would make a good story, because you have to strip away all of your writers defences (verbiage, detailed description, narrative interjection) and actually get down to saying something. Finding the nub of a story, the real important part, is the key to it. Often much longer pieces have only one central event, image or passage, so a 200 worder is almost like producing a two foot high sculpture from a 20 foot high piece of marble, chipping away and paring down.
In a 200 worder, it's not a case of lazy prose writing but, for me, lazy poetry. I know I'm crap at poetry, but need somewhere to sit tiny fragments of experience, observation or narrative, and the 200 word story does that for me.
I love writing them, I really do.
Cheers,
Mark
Paul Birtill's poem Work Shy Writer:
"You get lazy people
in any field, I write poems
instead of novels. You start
at nine and finish at half
past and have the rest of
the day tp yourself - money's
crap though..."
could sum it up.
Not sure it does, though.
I agree with Mark that writing (good) 200 words stories is hard.
But I disagree on the wider point that:
"Surely if it's a piece worth writing, then character and plot development demand that it is longer than 200 words."
When editing magazines, the most common problem I've come across - other than general delusion - is poems, stories or articles that are too long for themselves.
If you've got 200 words of stuff to say, it's best to say it in 200 words. The skill for a writer is being able to judge how many words you need to say what you're trying to say.
Any self-imposed restrictions can, I think, be a catalyst to creativity.
~PEPS~
Latest on The Art of Tea ( http://pepsoid.wordpress.com/ )...
"The Art of Flânerie"
Ha! I thought this would get you chatting. It's been a bit quiet unless you've been Banalling or Tateing.
I've been guilty of being a bit on the brief side myself: I wasn't trying to argue that "all 200-worders are shite" - good writing is good writing - but as a reader, I think I require MORE than just good writing; I need a to find out something about the character, on a level akin to if I was meeting them in real life. Yes, if I saw someone briefly for five minutes I might observe something that was descriptive of their character, but I wouldn't know for sure. Perhaps it's indicative of how I write - I like to take a character and then peel back layer after layer, and see how they behave in different circumstances...
Anyway, what I'm saying is that there is a distinction to be made between conciseness and brevity. The first one is always good, the second one is sometimes good.
(this isn't too long is it?)
Haiku's another example. Sometimes I can read a whole novel and it may entertain my thoughts for a while but some haiku can literally expand my consciousness in a way I never felt. :)
There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett
There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett
Have you read Dan Rhodes' "Anthropology," Ggggareth? 101 stories of exactly 101 words each... I recommend it!
~PEPS~
Latest on The Art of Tea ( http://pepsoid.wordpress.com/ )...
"The Art of Flânerie"
Cheers Peps, I'll give it a go. I'm shooting down my own argument here, but one of my favourite short story writers is Donald Barthelme, who published his stories in the New Yorker - and I don't think any of his works surpassed 1000 words.
I really don't think that "Short is Shit" - I just think there is a chance that a lazy writer would be encouraged to leave something that really needs to be developed further and be satisfied with it.
To take one of my own stories at random - FOUND - it only has one central theme, and I could easily outline the story in 200 words - but I doubt it would be any good.
I do recognise that there is a fun element to setting an artificial word limit, or some other structural challenge, but it's only wordplay - an alphabetical sudoku - real writing (I can feel your hackles rising - sorry) is about character, and that can't be limited in any way.
Real writing? Real writing??!!
***becomes aware of rising hackles***
... I'm not even going to go there!
I think, as Mark was suggesting, a lazy writer will be a lazy writer in whatever format, genre or whatever restrictions he/she imposes... a "real" (***ahem***) writer - perhaps one should say a writer who takes the time to really think, or at least really feel, what he/she is writing - can make any format (poem, 1000 word story, novel, 10 word story, screenplay, haiku...) feel like a "proper" piece of writing...
... whatever "proper" means!
~PEPS~
Latest on The Art of Tea ( http://pepsoid.wordpress.com/ )...
"The Art of Flânerie"
"real writing (I can feel your hackles rising - sorry) is about character, and that can't be limited in any way."
hmm. 'The Trial' isn't really about character, is it? The characters are all cyphers.
~
I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe
on The Big Issue thing - John Bird has just sprouted yet another little Bird and so is hors de combat at the moment but we will continue our debate on the future of the ABCtales page shortly.
Continuing on the Bird-spotting theme, I can confirm that there's an interview with him in this week's Third Sector and that my friend saw him at a meeting about homelessness policy last week.
I'm sure he's looking forward to a good debate, Tony.
"real writing (I can feel your hackles rising - sorry) is about character, and that can't be limited in any way."
Hmmm, well the only piece of fiction that fills this criteria is The Never Ending Story, a childhood favourite of mine... other than that, the fact there are two covers around a book means it is limited.
200 worders are so much fun and for reading on the web they are perfect. I love writing them. I also love writing my novel, dodgy poetry and emails. Oh, and I like writing comments on school kids books. And shopping lists.
Good point, Fergs. Internet reading can be hard work, sometimes.
In fact, I haven't disagreed with any of the points raised in this thread. I do realise that there are many types of writing out there, and that a well-witten 200-worder is a difficult thing to achieve, and that when I have a go I'm sure you'll critique it comprehensively. I sometimes like playing the devil's wotchamacallit, and this time it's got a good debate going - and I've also been given a few good pointers for what to read next - bonus!
Cheers everyone.
The All New Pepsoid the Second!
The All New Pepsoid the Second!
There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett
The All New Pepsoid the Second!
The All New Pepsoid the Second!
The All New Pepsoid the Second!